Currently in C++
neither of these are possible, the compiler complains that it expects an expression.
This appears trivial to me, if you're building a tuple like object with a variadic amount of types, how to check if all those types are nothrow
default
/ move
/ copy
constructible
?
This looks like an annoying language defect to me.
Any alternatives?
#include <iostream>
#include <type_traits>
template <typename... TYPES>
struct Test1 {
Test1()
noexcept(... && (std::is_nothrow_default_constructible_v<TYPES>)) {}
};
template <typename... TYPES>
struct Test2 {
Test2()
noexcept(std::conjunction_v<std::is_nothrow_default_constructible<TYPES>, ...>) {}
};
int
main() {
Test1<int, int, int> test1;
Test2<int, int, int> test2;
return 0;
}
Both are possible. You just didn't employ the correct syntax. It's
noexcept((... && std::is_nothrow_default_constructible_v<TYPES>))
or
noexcept(std::conjunction_v<std::is_nothrow_default_constructible<TYPES>...>)
The parentheses need to go around the entire fold expression in the first option. And in the second, the comma is superfluous. A comma separated list is already implied by the pack expansion in the second form.